Search results

1

Zapadno- i južnoslavenski romantizmi kao epoha demokratizacije kulture

100%

Zieliński B.

Poznańskie Studia Slawistyczne

|

2019

|

issue 17

321-333

EN

If we regard democracy as tied with four functions: availability, representation, freedom, and education, then we can state that the Romanticism conceived as the intellectual formation and literary current has managed to realize the deepest and thorough process of democratization of culture, of which results remain valid and actual in our contemporary reality. In the Romanticism, two traditions converge in order to construct its progressive character: the educational tradition derived from the German idealism and the liberation one. The educational tradition has been inspiring the development of knowledge, education and university values by shaping the holistic conception of education and personal progress. In this article, the educational orientation of the Romanticism is expressed by the function of availability concerning culture as well as education. The liberation current of the Romanticism is related with the French tradition, peoples as a subject that debates on the ideas of justice and injustice, and also with the folklore along with the independence narrative. The titular category namely, democratization of culture should be understood as a multifaceted phenomenon of the gradual and irreversible processes of innovations which have spread through the spheres of culture, language, system of forms of utterance in order to shape various social and cultural institutions, which – throughout the process of generating new literary canons and redefining modern national identities – eventually contributed to the constitution of the contemporary states.

2

Kasna antika: dekadencija ili „demokratizacija“ kulture?

88%

Milinović D.

Poznańskie Studia Slawistyczne

|

2019

|

issue 17

145-158

EN

In our age “without the emperor”, fascination with empires and with the emperor mystique continues. Take for witness Tolkien and his Return of the King, the third sequel of The Lord of the Rings, or the television serial Game of Thrones. In the background, of course, is the lingering memory of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, “a revolution which is still felt by all nations of the world”, to quote Edward Gibbon. It comes as a surprise that in this dramatic moment of its history, in times marked by political, economic and spiritual crisis that shook the very foundations of the Empire during the 3rd century, historians and art historians have recognized the revival of plebeian culture (arte plebea, kleinbürgerliche Kultur). It was the Italian historian Santo Mazzarino, talking at the XI International Congress of the Historical Sciences in Stockholm in 1960, who introduced a new paradigm: the “democratization of culture”. In the light of the historical process in the late Roman Empire, when growing autocracy, bureaucracy, militarization and social tensions leave no doubt as to the real political character of the government, the new paradigm opened up fresh approaches to the phenomenon of decadence and decline of the Roman world. As such, it stands against traditional scenario of the “triumph of barbarism and Christianity”, which was made responsible for the fall of the Roman Empire and the eclipse of the classical civilization of ancient Greece and Rome. It is not by accident that the new paradigm appeared around the middle of the 20th century, at the time when European society itself underwent a kind of “democratization of culture”, faced with the phenomenon of mass culture and the need to find new ways of evaluating popular art. Today, more than anything else, the notion of “democratization of culture” in late Roman Empire forces us to acknowledge a disturbing correspondence between autocratic and populist forms of government. It may come as a shock to learn that the very emperors who went down in Roman history as villains and culprits (such as Caligula, Nero or Commodus), were sometimes considered the most “democratic” among Roman rulers. Do we need to feel certain unease at this historical parallel?

3

Kultura popularna a kultura medialna - wybrane problemy teorii i rzeczywistości

63%

Pawlus T.

Warmińsko-Mazurski Kwartalnik Naukowy, Nauki Społeczne

|

2015

|

issue 2

47-65

XX

Spotykane w literaturze przedmiotu oraz w dyskursie publicznym pojmowanie kultury popularnej jako synonimu kultury masowej jest – w moim przekonaniu – nie do przyjęcia. Nie można zaprzeczyć, że takie podejście może prowadzić do „uporządkowania” obrazu zjawisk kulturowych poprzez wskazanie ich obszarów „pozytywnych” – kultura elitarna (wysoka) i obszarów „negatywnych” – kultura ludowa/masowa (niska). Jednakże nie da się też zaprzeczyć, że jest to czarno-biały obraz, który w zasadzie wyklucza optymistyczną refleksję wobec kultury popularnej, stanowiącej fenomen rzeczywistości społecznej współczesnego świata. Dzisiejszy uczestnik kultury bardziej wybiera niż odbiera przekazywane komunikaty. W takiej perspektywie kultura popularna jest źródłem emancypacji, ponieważ istnieje wiele „kultur prawomocnych” oraz sposobów odczytania komunikatów kultury „popularnej”. Jakkolwiek jednak by było, granice między kulturą elitarną (wyższą) a kulturą popularną (niższą) ulegają procesualnemu zacieraniu, zmianie i ponownemu nakreśleniu. W takim duchu argumentuje między innymi Jerzy Szacki, który stwierdza lapidarnie i dosadnie zarazem, że „popularną bywa nie tylko ewidentna tandeta, elitaryzm zaś nie stanowi żadnej gwarancji poziomu”. Człowiek współczesny żyje i funkcjonuje w świecie dynamicznego rozwoju mediów elektronicznych, co umożliwia wpływ odbiorców na różnorodne treści i formy przekazu kulturowego. Świat medialny tworzy zasadnicze ramy dyskursu publicznego, w którym coraz bardziej popularne staje się określenie homo medius.

EN

The equation of the term „popular culture” with „mass culture”, as seems has become common practice not only within the framework of public discourse but in specialized publications as well, in my opinion misses the point. Though it can hardly be denied that such an approach may facilitate the (simplified) labeling of cultural phenomena by pigeonholing them into „positive” and „negative” categories – upper class high brow culture (whatever this means) versus lower-class mass- or popular-culture, it is equally obvious that such an approach reduces a complex issue to an oversimplified black- and- white picture, which, from its outset, excludes to a certain degree the positive assessment of popular culture, which, after all, constitutes an important element of today’s social reality. Today’s culture consumers rather tend to select emitted messages actively than to receive them passively. By adopting this point of view, popular culture presents itself as a source of emancipation, as there exist as many distinct forms of received cultural patterns as there are various ways to interpret messages conveyed by means of popular culture. Likewise it can be observed, that there does not exist a fixedly defined line to separate superior forms of culture form its inferior manifestations, but there prevails a continuous shifting of boundaries that underlie permanent changes, eradications and new definitions. A similar opinion expresses- among others- Jerzy Sacki, who coined the phrase that „while the term popular does not necessarily include only trash elitism does not necessarily exclude it”. Modern man lives in a world of tremendously fast developing electronic media which gives the recipient the possibility at hand to control content and form of cultural transmissions. Today’s media-world decisively shapes the framework of public discourse and „homo medius” has become its integral part.

4

Od creatio ex nihilo do Cool Britannia. Ku źródłom dyskursu kreatywności

38%

Franczak K.

Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej

|

2018

|

vol. 14

|

issue 4

104-125

EN

The aim of the article is to analyse the “myth of origin” of the contemporary discourse of creativity and to reveal its constructed character. A sceptical look at the seemingly linear transformation of a popular idea reveals not only discontinuity and numerous ruptures in the process of changing the ways of understanding the concept, but also the unintended functions of contemporary explanations of the genesis of creativity. Analysis of ways of thematizing creativity in religious, artistic, philosophical and scientific discourse serves to answer the question, how creativity has become a core of the modernization narrative tied with the categories of innovation, creative industries, cultural economics and creative cities.

PL

Celem artykułu jest analiza „mitu pochodzenia” współczesnego dyskursu kreatywności i ujawnienie jego skonstruowanego charakteru. Sceptyczne spojrzenie na pozornie linearną transformację popularnej idei ujawnia nie tylko nieciągłość i liczne pęknięcia w procesie zmiany sposobów rozumienia pojęcia, ale także niezamierzone funkcje współczesnych objaśnień genezy kreatywności. Analiza sposobów tematyzowania kreatywności w dyskursie religijnym, artystycznym, filozoficznym i naukowym służy odpowiedzi na pytanie, w jaki sposób kreatywność stała się współcześnie filarem narracji modernizacyjnej wiązanej z kategoriami innowacji, przemysłów kreatywnych, ekonomii kultury czy tworzeniem „kreatywnych miast”.

Refine search results

2 Poznańskie Studia Slawistyczne

1 Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej

1 Warmińsko-Mazurski Kwartalnik Naukowy, Nauki Społeczne

1 Franczak K.

1 Milinović D.

1 Pawlus T.

1 Zieliński B.

2 2019

1 2018

1 2015

Zapadno- i južnoslavenski romantizmi kao epoha demokratizacije kulture

Kasna antika: dekadencija ili „demokratizacija“ kulture?

Kultura popularna a kultura medialna - wybrane problemy teorii i rzeczywistości

Od creatio ex nihilo do Cool Britannia. Ku źródłom dyskursu kreatywności